The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1887-11-18
LAMAR AND SPARKS.
Discord Existing Between the
Secretary and the Lend Com
missioner.
Lamar Sends Sparks Letter Remind
ing Him of His Subordinate Posi-
ton, And Also
A Letter to the President That One OF
the Other Would Have to Vacates -
Office.

Office.
| WARRINGTON, Nov l3.-Secretary Lamar
| yesterday afternoon sent long letter 10
! Commissioner Sparks, of the General Land
Office, replying very sharply to conf
Uiunication from the Commissioner re alive
to the adjustment OF the Chicago, st. Paul,
/ Minneapolis a. Omaha railway land grant,
and informing the Commissioner in conclu-
sion that either he or the Secretary must
forthwith retire from the department.
Secretary Lamar opens his letter by say
ing:
have just received communication bearing
| this date. changed by erasure and Interpolation
from 4 previous date, addressed to me by YOU,
and will try to answer it at once. as the matter
to which itrelates has been unnecessarily de-
tanned too long. Fortunately will be able to
do this more conveniently because every point
submitted has been the subject OF reconSidera-
ton, having been presented through the COL
umns of the press, whose enterprise put them
! in possession OF these points before was ap-
prsed that the decision referred to in your let
| ter had incurred your disapproval and met with
| your displeasure.
have neither the disposition to enter upon
| discussion with q subordinate nor to engage
with him in gladatorial combat, especially so,
| in a matter in which he has received my care
| fully matured instructions, matter Of pressing
| importance OF my public duties. In no other
! way can the functions OF public department.
! be successfully executed than for the chief to
! command and the subordnates to obey.
Your excuse for this extraordinary communi-
| cation is that an argumentatiye report OF yours
| rs to the Missouri. Kansas & Texas road had
! not been brought to my attention, and that the
Omaha cases were therefore before me without
citation of authority in support Of your ADJUST
! ment and without argument in behalf OF the
| United States. In this last assumption you are
| in error and the reverse of your statement is.
| the fact.
You commenced by advising me that my de-
cision in the Omaha case, rendered as you as
sert. wi bout the benefit OF your counsel, was in
direct anti gonism to any decision OF the de-
partment. -sr. .-
You however, Immediately state in substance
that prior to 1919 the Government rule of adj
iustrnent had been uniformly in accordance
with the practice laid down by me and the
identical report on the Missouri, Kansas j.
Texas case, to which you refer ne for your argu-
ment OF suits by the Government to recover
lands conveyed more than twelve years since
for precisely the character of lands discussed
in my decision OF the Omaha case. The only
answer you furnish me against this conceded
practice of the Government is that no formal
decision appears on the record upon the sub
ject in your Office.
The Secretary asks:
Am to understand that you do not consider
the uniform practice Of the Land Department
for twenty-five years having the force and
effect Of n decision unless the principles in
volved have been specifically controverted by
some one and freely submitted for discussion!
He then says he will not waste time in
the discussion Of certain decisions OF the
Supreme Court, Attorney-General Devens
and ex-Secretary Schurz on the Omaha
case, or in answering the Commissioners
criticisms Of the Secretary's earlier decis-
ion touching the same grant, and closes as
follows:
1t therefore only remains for me on this point
to dispose of your elementary citation OF legal
maxims by informing you that they are. in my
opinion, entirely irrelevant. The question has
not been as you suppose, so much the legal ef-
feet Of 4 provisO to a grant, but what would
be the meaning Of the provisO in this particular
grant.
1 gave you my opinion Of that meaning and
you have shown me no shadow Of n reason for
departing from the conclusions there stated.
However We may differ in our construction
Of statutes or Of decided cases and whatever
variance may exist in our conceptions of our
public duties 1 am constrained to say to you
that there is obviously one point upon which
we are in thorough accord. Upon this point
you have succeeded in the communication
before me in riveting in my mind q profound
conviction. The practical effect Of your present,
course is that you car execute my orders and
follow my instructions and cooperate in my adj
ministration without surrendering opinions
which should be conscientiOusiy entertained
with reference to the vitality Of important in
terests. am as sircere as you can be in the
profound conviction that my instructions to you
are in exact accordance with the law of Con-
greSs. In line with the decisions Of the courts,
and in support OF the supremacy of law and its
involability. it is impossible for me, in con-
travention Of my own opinions, arrived at after
long and anxious study, to surrender them to-
you.
Under the circumstances it is due to the Or
DERBY and decorous carrying on Of the Govern
ment, to important public interests and the
common cause confided in part to our hands by
the President and to the personal re,ard that
we should both entertain for him that he shall
be allowed to choose a Secretary Of the In
terror who will conform the administration to
your opinions or to appoint Commissioner OF
Public Lands, who will administer his bureau
in harmony of spirit and concert of action with
the chief Of the department and without put
ting him to the necessity OF more decisive
action on his part. This alternative I shall
submit to the President at the same time that
this paper will be handed to you.
Secretary Lamar addressed letter to
the President. He asks the President to-
decide which Of the two officials shall
leave the department. Commissioner
Sparks, who has been confined to his bed
for a day or two, quite ill, declined to talk
about the matter.